Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Recommend a documentary or book for an alien UFO novice

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I found Jim Marrs Alien Agenda to be very informative. Have shared that book with many friends!

Good luck on your journey to find truth. There is a lot of info out there only you can decide what to keep and what to discard.




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Hunt for the Skinwalker: Science Confronts the Unexplained at a Remote Ranch in Utah

The above book completely knocked my socks off and made me begin to realize us humans haven't even began to remotely scratch the surface in terms of knowledge regarding our planet and what is taking place on it. Remember, this book follows LEGITIMATE scientists trying to understand something that has completely defied all known fundamental scientific fact. There is currently also quite a large suspected conspiracy taking place regarding the rich tycoon Robert T. Bigelow and his company Bigelow Aerospace that currently owns the Skinwalker Ranch and the 400 acres of land it resides on. Many suspect the research conducted at the ranch fueled the research behind many of Robert T. Bigelow's aerospace projects.

The deeper you follow this story, it's history, previous owners and Bigelow Aerospace, you will be blown away just how deep the rabbit hole goes.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Jocko Flocko
 

That's a great book, and I've read it more than once. Definitely an eye opener. I would also recommend John Keel's 'The Mothman Prophecies'.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by Brighter
 



The Battelle Memorial Institute think-tank study (which produced the statistical data on which Blue Book Special Report #14 was based on) clearly indicates that the number of true Unknowns was 26.94%. 26.94% of cases doesn't sound like 'super rare' to me, unless you're using some kind of implicit scientific definition of 'super rare'.


You are confusing just not being able to identify something with a sighting so incredible that it is one of the very rare special cases. Only a very , very small percentage of the 26.94% you quoted will be in the 'super rare' category.


I don't think you understand what "Unknown" in terms of Project Blue Book meant. The label "Unknown" was reserved only for those cases in which all mundane and naturalistic explanations had been ruled out. I'm not claiming that there won't be some of these that can't upon further investigation be explained in mundane terms, but given the resources at their disposal, it seems unlikely that that would apply to a significant percentage of them.

I also have a couple of questions:

What is your source or evidence for the 5% that you quoted in your original post?

What is your source or evidence for the idea that "Only a very , very small percentage of the 26.94% you quoted will be in the 'super rare' category."

And what is your definition of 'super rare'? Do you have examples of such cases?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


Thanks for reminding me as I've been meaning to read that for a couple years now but I never could find it at my local book store and unfortunately it's not available via kindle or other digital copy. It's the book by John A. Keel correct?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Jocko Flocko
 


Yes, that's correct.

Similar phenomena is described in both HFTS and TMP. Keel records a lot of UFO activity in the book, also very strange MIB accounts, and posits his own theories, great book.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


My friend established an interesting funpage of his book titled: 777.

Things are gathered together there where he tries to put things in a harmony.. He discusses the whole universe, promotes some inspirational peoples ideas how it works, and what are the further implications of that in the fields of UFOs and our life in general. It is pretty interesting. It's also a pretty artistic approach anyway.

www.facebook.com...

cheers



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Brighter
 




I don't think you understand what "Unknown" in terms of Project Blue Book meant. The label "Unknown" was reserved only for those cases in which all mundane and naturalistic explanations had been ruled out.


Dont forget the end result of the project blue book was that there was nothing of interest to study.


Thousands of UFO reports were collected, analyzed and filed. As the result of the Condon Report (1968), which concluded there was nothing anomalous about UFOs, Project Blue Book was ordered shut down in December 1969


I'm sure that the first thing you will want to say is that you cant trust the government but if that's the case then you cant then go one to claim " The label "Unknown" was reserved only for those cases in which all mundane and naturalistic explanations had been ruled out.". You either trust what blue book had to say or you dont, you cant cherry pick bits of info to fit what you want to believe.

Encounters by the general public are notoriously inaccurate and hard to investigate. So a fantastic story described by john doe can just remain "Unknown" if it cant be proved to be anything normal. For example if i say i say a huge ship that zapped me and flew around at 10000 miles an hour and landed and you cant prove it wasnt something normal does than that becomes something unexplained.

As to what i think is a 'rare case' i would say something like Shag Harbor 1967 or Japan Air Lines flight 1628 incident.

Which stories out of the 26% (roughly 3000 cases) do you think are most likely to be real and what percentage of the 26% do they make up?

edit on 6-1-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Dont forget the end result of the project blue book was that there was nothing of interest to study.


Thousands of UFO reports were collected, analyzed and filed. As the result of the Condon Report (1968), which concluded there was nothing anomalous about UFOs, Project Blue Book was ordered shut down in December 1969



And my question to you would be: Given that the stated conclusion of Project Blue Book was completely at odds with the actual data collected, and given that the military and government would have a clear vested interest in playing down the results, why would you believe that the stated conclusion is an actual reflection of the data?

In other words, do you blindly follow a conclusion just because someone 'says' it's so, without looking at the data that that conclusion was based on, or do you look at the data and draw your own conclusions based on that?

You also quoted the results of the Condon Report. Do you have reason to believe that those conclusions were the results of an objective study? If you do, let me just remind you of this:


"Our study would be conducted exclusively by "Non Believers". The trick would be, I think, to describe the project so that to the public it would appear totally objective study. Conclusion...There is no secrecy and no evidence that such objects even exist."

Memorandum from Robert Low (before the report was started) - Project Administrator CONDON Report to Colorado University V.P. Thurston Marshall


Debunking the Condon Report


Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I'm sure that the first thing you will want to say is that you cant trust the government but if that's the case then you cant then go one to claim " The label "Unknown" was reserved only for those cases in which all mundane and naturalistic explanations had been ruled out.". You either trust what blue book had to say or you dont, you cant cherry pick bits of info to fit what you want to believe.


I think I am justified in trusting the data of the report and not trusting the conclusion for a couple of reasons:

1) The people responsible for the doing the actual investigations and the people responsible for preparing the conclusion were two different sets of people.

2) The conclusions are bizarrely at odds with the statistical data collected, and even seem to blatantly contradict it.

So your accusation of 'cherry picking' is unjustified, as it is quite reasonable to trust the numbers while not trusting the stated conclusion.

The bottom line is that the stated conclusions from Blue Book were based on cherry picking the data. The Air Force has a rich history of misrepresenting numbers as pertaining to the UFO phenomenon:


Based upon unreliable and unscientific surmises as data, the Air Force develops elaborate statistical findings which seem impressive to the uninitiated public unschooled in the fallacies of the statistical method. One must conclude that the highly publicized Air Force pronouncements based upon unsound statistics serve merely to misrepresent the true character of the UFO phenomena."
Yale Scientific Magazine (Yale University) Volume XXXVII, Number 7, April 1963


Offical UFO Unexplained Report Percentages

Here is Dr. Hynek's own assessment:


The statistical methods employed by Blue Book are a travesty on the branch of mathematics known as Statistics.



Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Encounters by the general public are notoriously inaccurate and hard to investigate. So a fantastic story described by john doe can just remain "Unknown" if it cant be proved to be anything normal. For example if i say i say a huge ship that zapped me and flew around at 10000 miles an hour and landed and you cant prove it wasnt something normal does than that becomes something unexplained.


No, absolutely not. Such an incredibly weak case as you're describing would never have been labeled as "Unknown" by Project Blue Book. You seem not to understand that "Unknown" was a technical rubric and not intended to simply mean 'unknown' in the colloquial sense. The case that you just described would most likely have been categorized as "Insufficient Data" or "Hoax", depending on the evidence.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 11:23 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Watch Coast to Coast with George Knapp of his interview with Aliens in The Forest (Donald Shrum the experiencer) authors and compare with Lonnie Zamora and Gary Wilcox do serious study of all three all happened in 1964 two of them the same day. Study the tubes, skippers site: mars anomaly research. Look for the bio sprayer on his first page. Read Ernest Normans book "The Truth About Mars available online. Notice the limited leaks of the mars nasa photos. Listen to Linda Moulton Howe's interview with a prision guard who say a ufo cloak itself.

And you are on the road in understanding their is a civilization that lives under the mars surface. And probably will be a clue in understanding why all the monolithic stones are of a visiting alien civilization thousands of years ago.

A theory yes, and there really are valid clues.





new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join